From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751958AbXBJV6Z (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:58:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751967AbXBJV6Z (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:58:25 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:4946 "EHLO spitz.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751958AbXBJV6Y (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:58:24 -0500 Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 19:38:52 +0000 From: Pavel Machek To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net, LKML Subject: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? Message-ID: <20070210193851.GA3956@ucw.cz> References: <1171058269.1484.64.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <1171059433.8675.195.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1171059433.8675.195.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > I don't think this is already done (feel free to correct me if I'm > > wrong).. > > > > Can we start to NAK new drivers that don't have proper power management > > implemented? There really is no excuse for writing a new driver and not > > putting .suspend and .resume methods in anymore, is there? > > to a large degree, a device driver that doesn't suspend is better than > no device driver at all, right? > now.. if you want to make the core warn about it, that's very fair Well, driver that is broken on SMP is arguably better than no driver at all, yet we'd probably avoid merging that. It would be nice to start including suspend in 'must work' list... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html